This invention relates to Flight Simulators, specifically to a new process method in the operation of the motion system to reduce energy expenses.
Where the term simulator is used it is referring to the types of Flight simulators used by military and commercial operators, that generally have a six-axis motion system. The six-axis simulators are commonly referred to as full flight simulators, six degrees of freedom simulators, phase 2 or 3 simulators, and now rated by the FAA as level C or D simulators.
Currently the normal operation of a six-axis simulator motion system is the manual selection of motor start switches by the simulator maintenance personnel. Typically there are five motor driven pumps on a six-axis simulator. The first motor typically is the smallest (10-20 hp.) and drives a cooling pump as well as a control loading pump. The cooling pump and the control loading system are generally left on at all times. Control loading is defined as the system that provides the realistic feel to the flight controls in the simulator. The other three motors are typically 50 hp. and each drives a large hydraulic pump. These hydraulic pumps supply flow and pressure to a common pressure line for the motion system. The motion system of a six-axis simulator consists of six actuators that are each controlled by complex servo systems. The motion system operates in one of four states, at rest (no pressure), at neutral (midpoint of travel), moving (simulating airplane characteristics), or in the on/off sequence (between at rest and neutral).
The flight instructor has access to the motion-on/off only and not the manual motor controls. Therefore he would have to call the simulator maintenance personnel if the motors/pumps were off at the beginning of the day (ref. FIG. 8). Typically the motors/pumps are left running when the simulator is intended to be used during that day and frequently left running at all times 24 hours a day. The typical cost to run the three motors is $3.80 per hour based on 5.5 cents per kilowatt hour. An average facility with ten simulators is spending about $300,000 per year just to power their motion motors.
The primary objective of the new process method of the present invention is to reduce energy costs. By adding the necessary electronics and logic circuitry, the on/off control of the motors will be automatic, therefore greatly increasing the off time of the motors and pumps.
Because it takes only seconds to start the motion motors, the automatic control will be activated by the flight instructor when selecting the motion-on or off switches. The flight instructor will also find it unnecessary to turn on the motion at the very beginning of the training session when the type of training only involves briefing, preflight checkout, or cockpit familiarization. This part of the process, method (informing the instructors of the new system) will add even more to the energy savings. The conditions that occur everyday that add to the automatic energy savings are, training sessions that are canceled, training sessions that do not require motion, breaks during sessions, early completion of sessions and unscheduled times during the day and at night when the motors and pumps are still running.
When the number of hours per year that fall into each category above are totalled, and that total is multiplied by the number of six-axis simulators in the U.S. or in the world, the result is significant, typically 2800 hrs. per year times 350 simulators in the U.S. equals 980,000 hours. An average estimate of $ 3.80 per hour to run the three motors times 980,000 hours equals 3.72 million dollars saved in the U.S. In the foreign countries with 500 simulators, the estimate equals 5.32 million dollars. This equals 9.04 million dollars saved worldwide.
Other advantages include the simplicity of the present invention which results in low installation costs, low maintenance costs and ease of operation (automatic).
The new process method of automatically controlling the on/off selections of the motion motors is explained (ref. FIG. 9). The basic overview of the new process method of the present invention can be viewed as an electronic decision maker receiving information by the sensing of prescribed conditions existing in the simulator motion and control loading cabinet, and creating the necessary outputs to accomplish the task of the new process method. This task is to start the motors when needed and then shut the motors off when the motion is not in use (ref. FIG. 11). Several circuit variations have been included to provide versatility. These circuits are all referred to as E.S.C.U.'s, (Energy Saving Control Unit).
At the start of a day the motion and control loading electronics will be in this state: cooling and control loading motor running, control loading system activated and each motion motor will show ready. The flight instructor, upon entering the simulator and closing the necessary doors, will not turn on the motion system until he actually needs it. Since the motion is not actually needed during the preflight, briefings and procedure explanations, the instructor can typically wait one-half hour before he actually turns on the motion system.
When the motion-on momentary pushbutton is selected, the motors will begin to automatically start one at a time in sequence. Then the drawbridge will raise up and the motion will pressurize, bringing the simulator up to the midpoint of travel. The training session will then commence for a period of time dependent on the type of training and number of pilots in the simulator.
When the instructor decides to finish or to take a break he will select the motion-off switch. The simulator will lower to the down position, depressurize and the drawbridge will lower. After a time period preset in the present invention, the motors will shut off automatically and return to their ready state.
Due to the many different types of simulators and design differences, there are many different approaches to implementing this new apparatus and process method. One way is to change the PROM logic in the motion and control loading electronic cabinet. This would not be a desirable way to accomplish the task due to the added complexity that would be inserted into the system. This would result in causing excessive downtime of the equipment due to increased troubleshooting time required to find and repair common faults.
The preferred approach is to add a circuit board containing the E.S.C.U. which circuit board and circuitry interfaces to the simulator motion and control loading cabinet. This makes it easier to install, remove and bypass when necessary to troubleshoot the system. This method also ensures that all safety interlocks, features and fault warning capabilities of the simulator are not downgraded. This E.S.C.U. board can be mounted in the motion cabinet with a wire wrap edge connector. The necessary signals are typically available on a wire wrap backplane.
The new process method will first of all reduce energy expenses. The average customer interested in the present invention pays over $500,000 per year in total electricity bills for their training facility. With the new system implemented it would decrease their total energy expenses by 15 to 20 percent.
Through use of the present system, the decrease in energy consumption will obviously benefit the simulator operator by means of cash savings, and subsequently benefit the world by means of preserving natural resources used in developing energy. Also the byproducts of developing energy such as pollution will be decreased.
Since this new process method can be implemented incrementally at each facility, the benefits can begin as the first E.S.C.U. is installed on the first simulator. The progress will continue at a steady rate as each simulator is equipped with the energy saving system. As new simulators are built they can be designed with the present invention in mind thus making it a standard feature on all flight simulators.